AceTKen

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Still nope. Geez, you are really dedicated to thinking the worst thing you can about people, hey?

I didn't say unfairly banned. I was confused as to why I was banned.

I did downvote one post near the time of the ban. I didn't look prior to that. 4 posts downvoted in ten months isn't normally something I'd associate with a ban. People don't generally ban for things that happened ten months ago. Especially since the votes were reasonably more private back then.

It's all one story. The same story. It evolved as I discovered more about what occurred. It's called learning. Make an attempt to do so as well please.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Just FYI, I'm not downvoting you.

The bad faith actors should be somewhat easy to pick out. They are in my Community anyway. They often have scads of downvotes they throw out in a short time, not a few over the course of months. Dunno if you are, but if you're using automation to ban, you may just want to tune it to be a little more lenient.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Maybe. Just I case, I wouldn't interact. I would report it to an Admin most likely.

From what I've seen, most Admins will either not let that stand or sadly lead the charge on the psycho shit.

If it's the first, you're good. It'll be gone soon.

If it's the latter, get the hell outta that instance and block it.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 32 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

It's perfectly distinguishable unless you're trying real hard to misinterpret what I said. As a Mod of a small Community myself, here's the difference in downvotes:

  1. Bad Faith Actor: Sees a post or a whole Community they don't like. Goes in and systematically downvotes a bunch of stuff on purpose. Topics, responses... everything. Downvotes because they hate the community and everything it stands for. See 50 downvotes in your Community in one day? That's these fuckers. Ban them. They are assholes and are vote manipulating. Probably ban them from related Communities for vote manipulation.

  2. Normal User: (--> We are here) May or may not comment in YOUR Community, especially if it's image-based. Sees a single post that they don't like out of thousands they see daily and downvotes it. Several months later, it may happen again. This is expected behaviour and is how an upvote / downvote system functions. Don't ban these or you're the asshole.

  3. Brigade Users: A coordinated attack to downvote or spam a Community stemming from some other place. They downvote everything and often post garbage. Ban these people. They are assholes and are vote manipulating. Probably ban them from related Communities for vote manipulation if not trying to seek an instance ban.

  4. Lurker: (The overwhelming majority of users are this) Indistinguishable from a Normal user in votes, but may not comment. May be an alt or bot account. Be wary. Check their post history to see if they're real people. If real, leave 'em alone. If empty, use your discretion. Don't ban from related Communities.

  5. Other: Downvotes accidentally when scrolling sometimes. These happen. May appear as a Lurker or a Normal User. Don't ban these or you're the asshole.

Hope that helps!

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 41 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (29 children)

I don't understand the thought process here. Like many, I don't browse Communities individually, I browse /All and sort by New.

So I am required to see something I like and upvote or else I am not allowed to an express an opinion in the community (or any tangentially linked community)?

If I see something I don't like (which is what the voting system is for), I should go to the Community it's posted in and make sure to upvote things before I downvote? That's the expected order of operations?

If not... what if, while browsing /All /New nothing randomly appears that the viewer likes enough to upvote? Is that then somehow the fault of the viewer and they should then be banned?

Am I interpreting your rulings correctly? 4 downvotes in the span of 10 months (judging by the times on those posts you listed) is a bannable offence? Seems rather heavy-handed to me.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

We found the answer (kinda)! It was @Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com See here: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/34853477

I was called out by name for a single downvote and culled from a score of Communities I did not participate in by them.

"Create more slop" is, in fact, a message I disagree with rather strongly and did downvote that (and only that) post. I PM'd the the mod in response to that post:

Brigading is organized. I, a single person, downvoted one post I saw in /All because it is actively content with a message I do not care for or agree with. Bad form would be going through everything in the community and downvoting. I didn’t do that either. What I had done is called “using the platform as intended.” And you overreacted with a ban.

So we've effectively solved the first part, but not the three Stable Diffusion parts... Those also seem to line up with another single downvote a month later. Again, hardly brigading or vote manipulation.

EDIT: Huh. Looks like we had someone in this thread downvoting nearly every post in here.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

Not doing either, actually. After the post was found it linked things up and, as I explained elsewhere, this still stems from one downvote on the thread you see above. "Create More Slop" is a message I disagree with. Slop is just garbage generated content, not even intentionally made stuff. Just... low-tier trash. Not really into destroying the planet for less-than-shitposting purposes.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Oh! That explains it! "Create more slop" is, in fact, a message I disagree with rather strongly and did downvote that (and only that) post. I PM'd the the mod in response to that post:

Brigading is organized. I, a single person, downvoted one post I saw in /All because it is actively content with a message I do not care for or agree with. Bad form would be going through everything in the community and downvoting. I didn’t do that either. What I had done is called “using the platform as intended.” And you overreacted with a ban.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Snoogums is correct, there was one downvote in one of those Communities, not in multiple. It was not in any way vote manipulation or brigading. Apologies if you're reading something else, but I felt I was being quite clear with my wording.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 days ago (10 children)

How can you tell what you downvoted while scrolling through the all feed or your subscriptions 3 months ago?

By looking at the ban times and then comparing to the (very few) number of downvotes I made on my account in a range around that period.

But they could have based the decision on other behaviour or downvotes of yours.

I hadn't participated in those Communities outside that downvote whatsoever, so that would be doubtful.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 days ago (12 children)

There might be a misunderstanding... I only downvoted one post in one of those communities once. The others were untouched. As I said, some of them don't even have any posts to downvote.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Wouldn't one glance at my long-standing profile and the fact that it was only a single vote made out of the nearly a dozen communities that I was banned from indicate that I'm not part of a brigade?

 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This weekly thread will focus on the phrase "The Cruelty Is The Point", which may take some explanation.

Frequently on Lemmy (and elsewhere), I see the phrase in comment threads. In my experience, it has been referencing any policy that is contrary to a Liberal or Leftist belief that the thread discusses. I have found the phrase when discussing trans issues, housing, taxes, healthcare, abortion, and many more.

This does not mean it doesn't exist elsewhere, it is simply where I see it since I spend much of my social media time on Lemmy. If your experience differs, please let us know!

Some Starters (and don’t feel you have to speak on all or any of them if you don’t care to):

  • Do you believe this? If so, why?
  • Is it true / false in some or all scenarios?
  • Is it with certain groups or regarding certain things?
  • Do you feel that speech like this is conducive to fixing societal issues?
  • Is what is considered "kind" always the best course of action?
1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This weekly thread will focus on Protests, both effective and ineffective.

Over the past 15 years, we've seen more protesting since the 1960's in North America. Some feel they are needed, and some feel they are wasteful and silly.

Some Starters (and don’t feel you have to speak on all or any of them if you don’t care to):

  • Have you ever taken part? What was it and why?
  • What protests have you felt have been effective or ineffective?
  • If you feel they are not effective in general, what would you rather people do?
  • Have you ever had your opinion swayed by any form of protest? Please note that this could be either to the side of the protesters or away from their cause.
  • How would you try to ensure a successful protest?
  • Do you feel that violent protest is mostly uncalled for? If not, how do you know when you need to escalate things?
  • Just for fun, what is the absolute worst protest you've ever heard of?
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This weekly thread will focus on work and work culture.

This has been a back-burnered issue since COVID came and upended many workplace traditions worldwide, but I'd really like to hear about what you all think about it!

Some Starters (and don't feel you have to speak on all or any of them if you don't care to):

  • What is the ideal work / life balance? Right now, the worldwide average is 5 days per week, 8-5 PM. Is this too much / too little / just right?
  • With productivity skyrocketing and wages falling, what would you like to see to fix things?
  • Would you accept less money and shorter hours?
  • What would you feel minimum wage should do to adjust?
  • Do you feel that the current resurgence of Unions is positive or negative?
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

No, it's not a joke. I'm frustrated and I'm probably not choosing my words carefully.

This community has had steadily falling engagement - our last 3 weekly threads have had a grand total of 1 (excellent and well-articulated) response, and the number of topics not generated by myself (or the other mod) since the inception of the community has also been 1.

Very few people want to actually talk. From what I've seen, the masses want the same things that they wanted on Reddit:

  1. Memes
  2. Articles they don't read (but will bitch about endlessly) that reinforce their opinion
  3. Angry responses to someone (who may be trolling) that reinforce the current politics of the reader (that they couldn't have given a fuck about a few years ago until it became heavily politicized)
  4. Shitty easy jokes
  5. Personal politics circlejerking

I hate that I can see a hundredth point-free meme post and view 200 replies on it. I hate that it's just the same talking points being strawmanned over and over again in every thread. I hate that any point outside common groupthink is downvoted to oblivion and buried instead of discussed.

The reason I'd like to back away from Lemmy seems to be the same reason I started this community: we need more people who can articulate points, and less downvoting, but it doesn't seem to be getting better.

Maybe one day, but today is not that day. Lemmy needs to mature in more ways than one.

2
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This weekly thread will focus on current political divisiveness occurring nearly worldwide. I'd post links, but I feel that everyone knows what I'm speaking about.

This issue has been especially prevalent in American politics as of late, but it is felt nearly everywhere.

Some Starters:

  • What do you feel has caused it? Add proofs if possible.
  • Once caused, what has added to it and why?
  • What can be done to ameliorate the issue, if anything? On a personal scale or a national one.
  • Can it be remedied or is civil war the only option?
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This week’s Weekly discussion thread we will focus on Activism, both positive and negative.

Here is the definition we will be using, so please make sure your argument matches.

Some starters:

  • What would you classify as effective forms of activism?
  • What are ineffective forms of activism?
  • How does a group know when their mission is achieved? What if the mission is ambiguous or changes over time?
  • Do you feel they stop too early or too late?
1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This week’s Weekly discussion thread will be trying something new. We'll be focusing on the age old question "If you could change one thing positively in the world what would you change?"

Difficulty Level: (Pick your difficulty, let us know what you picked, and stick to it)

  1. Go wild.
  2. You can't harm others.
  3. The change has to be somewhat realistic or believable.
  4. If I could convince 1,000,000 people right now, it would work.
  5. If I could convince 100,000 people right now, it would work.
  6. Souls Mode: If I could just get motivated, I could do this myself.

(Also, let me know if these "fun" weeks are welcome here, or just stupid)

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This week’s Weekly discussion thread will be focused on Linux. I know that Lemmy is VERY biased towards Linux and FOSS, but I'm curious what non-technical people feel about it and what your thoughts are.

Some starters:

  • Have you used Linux? If so, what was your experience like?
  • Would you run it as your primary system? Why or why not?
  • What would it take to get you to do so?
  • Do you feel it's a solid option?
  • Are there any changes that you'd think would benefit consumers and aid with adoption?
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This week’s Weekly discussion thread will be focused on Capitalism / Economic Systems. Here is the definition we will be using so everyone can use the same terminology. If your argument does not use that definition, we ask that you reframe so that it does so that everyone can work within the same framework.

Here are some questions that should help kickstart things:

  • Is capitalism effective? Is it good, or as evil as some Lemmy instances will have you believe?
  • Are there better alternatives, and why are they better?
  • How could we realistically move toward those alternatives?
  • Is there anything you do not understand or would like to discuss about Capitalism / Economic Systems?
1
(ARTICLE) Racism In D&D (www.polygon.com)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion). You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

I dislike this article. It's a little old now, but there are several things blisteringly wrong with this idea at its heart.

Purely for example, if you read a book on dragonflies and take offence because you see racial similarities between whatever race a person is and dragonflies, that's an issue with you, not the source. You are relying on your opinion on what the source says. Since opinion varies per person, you should not dictate policy based on opinion. It's an insurmountable hill to cater to whatever opinions are since opinion will always change - it's an unsound basis for any form of logic.

Let's do a thought experiment:

If a trailer-dwelling white person in the USA reads about the Vistani, and takes offence because they also live in a trailer, sees that as a negative, and assumes the Vistani are a potshot at him, is he right to be offended and call for a ban?

If a nimble Canadian POC (which is also a terrible term as it literally applies to everyone on the planet) reads about Elves and assumes they're talking about him because he also happens to know how to use a bow and is skinny with a lithe frame, is he correct in calling for a ban? What if he sees being nimble as a negative for some reason (because positive / negative characteristics are opinions and what people see as negative is not objective)? What if he sees it as being racist by saying the source is calling ALL Elves nimble and therefore good at sports? "But they stereotypically have a different skin colour!" I hear you saying. So do Orcs. That argument applies here and if you can't square that circle, then the logic falls apart utterly.

Personal identification with aspects of characters in a source material are not cause for alteration. You are an individual; you are not a group. Grouping people into camps based on visible traits or histories is a disgusting habit.

Treat people as individuals and racism dies. Treat people as groups and call out the differences constantly and you'll have people fencing themselves in while calling themselves inclusive.

 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion). You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

This week's Weekly discussion thread will be focused on Gender. Here is the definition we will be using so everyone can use the same terminology.

Here are some questions that should help kickstart things:

  • Why do you feel it started entering public consciousness in regards to humans about 15 years ago?

  • Was it needed?

  • Did it do what it was intended to do?

  • Are things better or worse now in that specific area?

  • Is there anything you do not understand or would like to discuss about the idea of gender?

3
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

First and foremost, let me say that I appreciate you actually engaging in a real discussion on Lemmy!

WHY?

This Community was made in response to the rest of Lemmy and the way many otherwise interesting discussion threads fall apart into downvoting, groupthink, and burying of posts composed by people asking for clarification or looking to understand the reasoning behind things.

We don’t like people making baseless accusations; we defend people on all sides when people are wrong about their opposition. We don't appreciate it when people think they know what others think and project incorrect (and often evil) bullshit on each other. We dislike people being wilfully wrong because their group fetishizes a certain angle of the truth instead of the boring reality of the situation.

It is important to maintain solid reasoning and conclusions, not just one or the other.

Ideas, word definitions, and discussion are important. We don’t feel we can get out of the current slump we’re in with political discourse unless we are able to clearly articulate ourselves and discuss the world we're all living in.

DO:

  • Be civil. This does not mean you shouldn’t challenge people, just don’t be a dick about it. Disagreeing with reasons someone gives and articulating that like an adult is fine, mocking or insulting someone is not.
  • Upvote interesting points and things that are well-articulated, even if you may not agree.
  • Upvote when you see others correct themselves, help out, or change their mind.
  • Be prepared to back up any claims you make with an unbiased source that you've actually read.
  • Be willing to be wrong, and admit when you are incorrect or spoke poorly. If you are the OP of a thread, feel free to edit the main post, and add an edit to the end to show your opinion has changed (especially for a CMV).
  • Be a “Devil’s Advocate” if there's no opposition and you can see some arguments for the other side you'd like to see addressed. You do not have to believe either side of an issue in order to generate solid points on a view.
  • Discuss hot-button issues.
  • Use bracket tags in the title to show the kind of post you're making (see below), and try to use the disclaimer if it's your style to help those coming in from outside the Community who may not understand it.
  • Add humour, and be creative! Dry writing isn’t super fun to read or discuss.
  • Post any rule, formatting, or changes here that you would like to see us make.

DO NOT (and depending on severity or number of times done, these can be bannable offences):

  • Call people names or label people. We fight ideas, not people here.
  • Ask for sources, and then not respond to the person providing them. This means you're not here to better yourself or the discussion, and it's rude to waste someone's time by challenging them and then just walking away.
  • Mindlessly downvote people or topics you disagree with. We only downvote people that do not add to the discussion.
  • Be a bot, spam, or engage in self-promotion unless explicitly allowed by the mods.
  • Duplicate posts from within the last month unless new non-trivial information is surfaced on the topic.
  • Strawman.
  • Expect that personal experience or your personal morals are a substitute for proof.
  • Exaggerate. Not everyone slightly to the right of you is a Nazi, and not everyone to the left is a Tankie.
  • Copy an entire article in your post body. It’s just messy. Link to it and summarize if needed along with your view on the article.

SUBMISSION RULES:

All main posts should append a bracket tag to the front to describe the topic type:

  • (WEEKLY) Will be reserved for Mods as it will be used for the pinned featured weekly topic thread. If you'd like to guest-host one, by all means, send a mod a PM and we'll schedule you one!
  • (CMV) Change My View can read like a rant or some scattered thoughts on a topic that the creator is looking to challenge themselves on. You must start with some initial reasons along with some thoughts on how those reasons led you to feel the way you do. If you can articulate things that would or wouldn't change your mind, please add those as well. If your mind is changed, we ask that you place a link to the post that did so at the end of the main post as an edit.
  • (OPEN-ENDED) for a general prompt to show that you're looking to see what people think. A good place to seek answers to questions that you haven't thought of yet.
  • (ARTICLE) for a link to an article to be discussed. Please link the main source, not a news link already talking about the source and give a few initial thoughts.
  • (STEELMAN) is discussion on hard mode and is the opposite of a strawman argument. This is someone making as close to an iron-clad argument as they can for a side or an opinion and challenging you to poke holes in it where you can.
  • (OTHER) is, for now, what we call everything else. I think we covered most of it above, but just in case, there's OTHER.

We would encourage you to also have our Disclaimer bolded at the front to help show how we're different to those coming in from browsing New or All posts which should hopefully help curtailing the drive-by downvoting that was so common in our early days:

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

And finally, none of these are so set in stone that we can't change them. If you want to see adjustments or changes, let us know here or in Private Message!

view more: ‹ prev next ›